Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-08-2015, 05:36 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,387,159 times
Reputation: 4113

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
So they must give up their 2nd Amendment rights in order to adopt?

They need to take this to a higher court. Too bad the ACLU won't help on 2nd Amendment issues.
No one is saying they have to give up their precious guns. They just need to keep the guns and ammunition locked and stored separately-as any responsible parent with children in the home should.

But apparently being able to carry around their loaded guns in the home is far more important to them than fostering a child and the safety of children in the home.

In my opinion when someone puts their desire for carrying loaded guns around over their desire to foster a child, they don't deserve to be parents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-08-2015, 05:44 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,059,937 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
What's wrong with regulations that guns and ammunition be stored and locked up separately in homes with foster children?

Why should they be held to a different standard than anyone else? This isn't about foster parents either, they want to adopt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 06:14 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
9,267 posts, read 5,121,245 times
Reputation: 8471
Foster kids in homes with firearms is no different than natural born kids in homes with firearms.
Sounds like a law suit to me. Hope they break the agency's bank.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 06:19 AM
 
59,053 posts, read 27,318,346 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
More anti gun policies hurting children. Instead of a 12 year old going into a loving home, the child will now continue to bounce around foster homes where a child is more likely to be abused. The anti gun zealots keep implementing policies that do nothing but hinder civil rights, and in this case, keep a child from a loving family. Anyone who knows anything about adoptions know how hard it is to find families for older children. It is a sad day.



A Nevada couple has been told that they can't adopt a 12-year-old child because they have legal concealed-carry permits.

Brian and Valerie Wilson asked the Assembly Judiciary Committee last week to approve a bill that would allow them to carry loaded weapons and serve as foster parents.

The couple’s attempts at adopting have been stopped by regulations requiring that guns and ammunition be stored in separate, secure containers in any home where foster children reside.

"My wife Valerie and I have been together since high school," Wilson told the committee. "We have always planned from early on that we would adopt later in life. We, in 2013, decided it was now time to go ahead and adopt and complete our family."

"There [are] a lot of older children in the system that need homes."
'Heartbroken' Couple Denied Foster Children Because of Legal Gun Permits
Which is one reason so many adopt foreign children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 06:20 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
9,267 posts, read 5,121,245 times
Reputation: 8471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
No one is saying they have to give up their precious guns. They just need to keep the guns and ammunition locked and stored separately-as any responsible parent with children in the home should.

But apparently being able to carry around their loaded guns in the home is far more important to them than fostering a child and the safety of children in the home.

In my opinion when someone puts their desire for carrying loaded guns around over their desire to foster a child, they don't deserve to be parents.
Clearly you are against gun ownership. Tell us how being a foster child differs from being a natural born child in this situation.
You imply that foster children aren't as trustworthy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 06:29 AM
 
59,053 posts, read 27,318,346 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
But they made their choice. Carrying a loaded gun around was more important to them than fostering a child who needs a home.

What's wrong with regulations that guns and ammunition be stored and locked up separately in homes with foster children?

Only in America....
"they can't adopt a 12-year-old child because they have legal concealed-carry permits.


Do they requirements to lock up bleach, iodine, or number of things that can be dangerous?

I guess you think they should NOT allow the kids to get a driver's license either since MORE people are killed with cars then guns.

" guns and ammunition be stored and locked up separately" is stupid in the first place.

Think about it. Someone is breaking into your house. Your nervous and scared.

How long do you think it will take you to locate the 2 and unlock them then load up?

Now imagine it is dark and you can't risk turning on a light.

How are you going to find your keys in the dark?

how are you going to find your gun and your ammo if they are stored separately in the dark?

How are you going to load the gun in the dark?

Do you think, I am being very generous here, you can do all this BEFORE the possibly ARMED intruder gets to you or your family?

Lack of common sens never ceases to amaze me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 06:55 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,387,159 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove View Post
Clearly you are against gun ownership. Tell us how being a foster child differs from being a natural born child in this situation.
You imply that foster children aren't as trustworthy.
How am I implying that foster children aren't trustworthy? Foster children are wards of the State. The State is still responsible for their safety.

Frankly, any parent who carries a loaded gun around with children in the house, is not a responsible parent in my opinion.

I'm Australian. I haven't grown up being been brainwashed by American gun culture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 06:59 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,387,159 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"they can't adopt a 12-year-old child because they have legal concealed-carry permits.


Do they requirements to lock up bleach, iodine, or number of things that can be dangerous?

I guess you think they should NOT allow the kids to get a driver's license either since MORE people are killed with cars then guns.

" guns and ammunition be stored and locked up separately" is stupid in the first place.

Think about it. Someone is breaking into your house. Your nervous and scared.

How long do you think it will take you to locate the 2 and unlock them then load up?

Now imagine it is dark and you can't risk turning on a light.

How are you going to find your keys in the dark?

how are you going to find your gun and your ammo if they are stored separately in the dark?

How are you going to load the gun in the dark?

Do you think, I am being very generous here, you can do all this BEFORE the possibly ARMED intruder gets to you or your family?

Lack of common sens never ceases to amaze me.
Any responsible parent with young children would put bleach, iodine etc out of reach of a child or have child locks in place on cupboards.

If I lived in an area where house-break-ins were common, I would have better security installed for a start rather than keep a loaded gun around where a child could get at it. Someone wanting to rob a house would look for easier pickings. So if someone was still stupid enough to try to break into my house when it would be obvious there was a security system and solid door/window grills, alarms would be going off and the security cameras would be recording, and the security company would be calling the police. If I had none of that, I would get out of the house and call the police.

Frankly if someone with a gun were that scared and nervous, they'd probably end up accidently shooting themselves in the foot. Or worse... their child coming into their bedroom.

This American fascination with owning guns never ceases to amaze me. The US is an interesting place to visit (and I have many times), but I'm glad I live in Australia.

Last edited by Ceist; 03-08-2015 at 07:58 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 07:28 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
9,267 posts, read 5,121,245 times
Reputation: 8471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
Any responsible parent with young children would put bleach, iodine etc out of reach of a child.

If someone was breaking into my house, I'd get out of the house asap and call the police.

This American fascination with owning guns never ceases to amaze me.
There you go. You don't understand. That precludes your weighing in on the issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 07:28 AM
 
2,499 posts, read 2,627,203 times
Reputation: 1789
I favor the unlimited right to own a gun- any gun but I agree with Ceist here. Also we have no idea if they left hazardous chemicals around if they would be denied the right to either foster or adopt a child.

When my daughter was young and going to a new friends home I always asked if they had weapons and if they did I wanted to see how they were secured. If the family did not want me to know or show me or my wife how they were secured my daughter did not go. That does not make me anti-gun.

As I said I could care what type of weapon someone owns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:09 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top